how come subjective viewpoint cinema doesn't work? - rec.arts.movies.past-films

Message from discussion how come subjective viewpoint cinema doesn't work?

Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: symphonic...@hotmail.com (choral reef)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.past-films,alt.movies,rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.cult-movies
Subject: how come subjective viewpoint cinema doesn't work?
Date: 10 Jun 2004 21:38:37 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <7b98c3ee.0406102038.36cee3ea@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.131.2.13
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1086928717 11701 127.0.0.1 (11 Jun 2004 04:38:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 04:38:37 +0000 (UTC)

of course, most movies use momentary subjective view shots but how
come camera is a poor substitute for extended subjective shots?
how come movies that utilize long subjective take--lady in the
lake--are considered aesthetic failures?

could citizen kane have worked using subjective perspective throughout
as originally planned?

now explain memory flashbacks or dreams. these are meant to be
personally subjective. yet, in most movies we see the person whose
dream or memory it's supposed to be in the dream or memory flashback.
isn't this kinda absurd?
yet, it always works. why? 

best use of subjective shot? 

goodfellas when the guys in a restaurant greet henry.